[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: Renamer-att (was: Can XLink be fixed?)

• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: Renamer-att (was: Can XLink be fixed?)
• From: Arjun Ray <aray@n...>
• Date: Sat, 24 Aug 2002 23:01:54 +0000
• In-reply-to: <0uvfmukdredrghn8nknrsmai0a4qrk979k@4...>
• References: <r01050300-1015-F0FD3010AFF411D683CE0003937A08C2@[192.168.124.21]> <000001c24b8a$f914b890$6801a8c0@d...> <0uvfmukdredrghn8nknrsmai0a4qrk979k@4...>

I wrote...:

| Thusly:
| 
|  <!ELEMENT  img       EMPTY
|             >
|  <!ATTLIST  img
|             xmlmap    NMTOKENS   #FIXED  "xlink foomap"
|             foomap    CDATA      #FIXED  "type type href href"
|             type      NAME       #FIXED  "simple"
|             href      CDATA      #REQUIRED
|             -- etc. --
|             >

...and butchered the example.  I meant 'src' instead of 'href', of course.
Sorry for the confusion.

Some further notes:

1.  The form-att facility becomes a special case of renamer-att with the
'#GI' keyword.  For instance, the 'type' attribute in the XLink spec is
just a stand-in for an element type concept.  So, if there were a 'simple'
element type in Xlink, the mapping could look like this

:             foomap    CDATA      #FIXED  "#GI type src src"

2.  Some systems may want something like the ArcAuto facility (where name
recognition is built-in based on prior knowledge of the relevant DTD).  In
practice, this means that the name map is trivial (the external names are
used locally in unchanged form).  This could be indicated by a keyword
"#AUTO" in the value of the xmlmap attribute (i.e. xmlmap="xlink #AUTO").

3.  Did I mention that we don't need PE's at all for this to work?
 

• References:
  • Re: Re: Can XLink be fixed?
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
  • RE: Re: Can XLink be fixed?
    • From: "Keith W. Boone" <keith@w...>
  • Renamer-att (was: Can XLink be fixed?)
    • From: Arjun Ray <aray@n...>

• Prev by Date: Renamer-att (was: Can XLink be fixed?)
• Next by Date: Re: Architectural Forms revival?
• Previous by thread: Renamer-att (was: Can XLink be fixed?)
• Next by thread: Re: Re: Can XLink be fixed?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread